Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] Voting Porcedure
Verner: Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the ALAC members and the board members. That vote will start today. With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce confusion. On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann@datenschutzverein.de> wrote:
Hello,
on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read:
"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the beginning of the voting"
There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong recommendation" will be accepted.
Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no need for such a ranking.
After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members are to elect.
Kind Regarts,
Werner Hülsmann
#################################################### Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de ####################################################
--
Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de
_______________________________________________ EURO-ALS mailing list EURO-ALS@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.icann...
-- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
Hello, my first question: "noon UTC" is 1 pm GMT? For the ALAC-Seats the rankingsystems makes for me no sense and it seems to be not democratical for such a few seats to elecect. Therefor we should use for the election of the ALAC-Seats tweo possible Votes for each voter. Greatings, Werner Nick Ashton-Hart schrieb:
Verner:
Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the ALAC members and the board members.
That vote will start today.
With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce confusion.
On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann@datenschutzverein.de> wrote:
Hello,
on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read:
"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the beginning of the voting"
There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong recommendation" will be accepted.
Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no need for such a ranking.
After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members are to elect.
Kind Regarts,
Werner Hülsmann
#################################################### Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de #################################################### -- Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de
Dear all, we are about to take decisions which will have a strong influence not only on the way internet user from Europe are represented within ALAC but also in what atmosphere we will continue our cooperation. I got the impression we are dealing with a constituency more or less split in half on whom to elect for the 2 ALAC seats: one group favouring Patrick/Sebastian the other group favouring Veronica Therefore I suggest that we agree on sending Veronica and either Patrick or Sebastian. That would leave us with two decisions: - Patrick or Sebastian - Who Veronica or Patrick/Sebastian should get the 2-year term. If we can reach the agreement and decide the two remaining questions, we would either skip the vote or vote in a way to reach the desired result. This way the rules would not be bent. Maybe Patrick and Sebastian could negotiate amongst themselves who would withdraw his candidacy if we reach the agreement described above. Christoph
Christoph, I hope that you are not right in observing that there is [already] grouping here. It's pretty normal to have three candidates for two positions, and only a vote can determine who will make it. To use an example - there were elections at ISOC, for two seats on the Board. The candidate who got most of the votes was elected for a full 3-year term. The candidate who had the second place in votes, got the second slot, which is for one year only. Therefore, let the vote decide who will win. If we eliminate one of the candidates before the vote has started, do you think that's the right thing to do? veni At 14:11 5/11/2007 +0200, you wrote:
I got the impression we are dealing with a constituency more or less split in half on whom to elect for the 2 ALAC seats: one group favouring Patrick/Sebastian the other group favouring Veronica
Therefore I suggest that we agree on sending Veronica and either Patrick or Sebastian.
As far as I understood and have followed the discussions, no one has explicitly expressed who would be elected ! If the discussions continue we will never finalize the selection of our representatives in ALAC in Puerto Rico. I'm afraid that, in the near future, we will not be able to finalize priorities in regards the requirements and comments received from the community we want to represent. May I gently ask again to please let us go for voting. Whatever method is used, there will always be some of us not being happy with the outcome. It looks as if, after the elections, we will have some other discussions and debates on the outcome, which would really damage the image of EURALO. Having to talk to governmental bodies on how we are progressing in EURALO I have bloss on my face and prefer to hide myself if I would have to explain the *combat* in our setup. I know I'm going to have pro's and contra's, but please this does not help the individual, issue of already long discussions in Lisbon and later on ... May I suggest we just send a message, each of us ALSes who signed to MoU, to Nick confirming we want to progress with the proposal as expressed clearly by Nick ? Thanks for helping me (and us) in reading less mails ! Best regards Rudi Vansnick Dr. Christoph Bruch schreef:
Dear all,
we are about to take decisions which will have a strong influence not only on the way internet user from Europe are represented within ALAC but also in what atmosphere we will continue our cooperation.
I got the impression we are dealing with a constituency more or less split in half on whom to elect for the 2 ALAC seats: one group favouring Patrick/Sebastian the other group favouring Veronica
Therefore I suggest that we agree on sending Veronica and either Patrick or Sebastian.
That would leave us with two decisions: - Patrick or Sebastian - Who Veronica or Patrick/Sebastian should get the 2-year term.
If we can reach the agreement and decide the two remaining questions, we would either skip the vote or vote in a way to reach the desired result.
This way the rules would not be bent.
Maybe Patrick and Sebastian could negotiate amongst themselves who would withdraw his candidacy if we reach the agreement described above.
Christoph
_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...
Dear Christoph, dear colleagues, I agree on the observation of the current situation and think, your proposal would be an excellent way to get to an agreement everybody can live with. Best Stefan Am 11.05.2007 um 14:11 schrieb Dr. Christoph Bruch:
Dear all,
we are about to take decisions which will have a strong influence not only on the way internet user from Europe are represented within ALAC but also in what atmosphere we will continue our cooperation.
I got the impression we are dealing with a constituency more or less split in half on whom to elect for the 2 ALAC seats: one group favouring Patrick/Sebastian the other group favouring Veronica
Therefore I suggest that we agree on sending Veronica and either Patrick or Sebastian.
That would leave us with two decisions: - Patrick or Sebastian - Who Veronica or Patrick/Sebastian should get the 2-year term.
If we can reach the agreement and decide the two remaining questions, we would either skip the vote or vote in a way to reach the desired result.
This way the rules would not be bent.
Maybe Patrick and Sebastian could negotiate amongst themselves who would withdraw his candidacy if we reach the agreement described above.
Christoph
-- Stefan Hügel (sh@fiff.de) FIfF - Forum InformatikerInnen für Frieden und gesellschaftliche Verantwortung e.V. Geschäftsstelle: Goetheplatz 4, D-28203 Bremen Telefon +49 421 33659255 - Fax +49 421 33659256 - http://www.fiff.de - fiff@fiff.de
Hello Christoph, thats a very good idea! Kind Regards, Werner Dr. Christoph Bruch schrieb:
Dear all,
we are about to take decisions which will have a strong influence not only on the way internet user from Europe are represented within ALAC but also in what atmosphere we will continue our cooperation.
I got the impression we are dealing with a constituency more or less split in half on whom to elect for the 2 ALAC seats: one group favouring Patrick/Sebastian the other group favouring Veronica
Therefore I suggest that we agree on sending Veronica and either Patrick or Sebastian.
That would leave us with two decisions: - Patrick or Sebastian - Who Veronica or Patrick/Sebastian should get the 2-year term.
If we can reach the agreement and decide the two remaining questions, we would either skip the vote or vote in a way to reach the desired result.
This way the rules would not be bent.
Maybe Patrick and Sebastian could negotiate amongst themselves who would withdraw his candidacy if we reach the agreement described above.
Christoph
#################################################### Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de #################################################### -- Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de
Dear all, Can we please proceed as has been defined, written on paper, agreed during Lisbon meetings and signed on the 29th or later by electronic signature ? Following this mailing list, the debates and long discussions are so time consuming that at the end I'm wondering why we have decided to start the Euralo ? If we are going to continue as we have been doing till today, I'm afraid we will never listen to the desire of the individual Internet user, as he/she can express so many different needs and comments. I dare hope everyone will point his/her noose in the same direction as soon as possible. I have already received several questions from the individual Internet user, who found out that EURALO, and of course our ALS, is open for comments from the public and should be operational. That is at least the message seen by the public, they don't see the ongoing discussions (luckily they don't). Please may I ask gently to stop putting question marks behind every message send to the list ? Let us work ... my sleeves are already up ... let's do something please Best regards, Rudi Vansnick Chair ISOC Belgium Nick Ashton-Hart schreef:
Verner:
Thank you for your note. The first vote will be to decide whether or not the single ALS who is not a party to the MoU will be voting on the ALAC members and the board members.
That vote will start today.
With respect to the ranking system: This is what was decided in Lisbon as the procedure to be used, and so that procedure is carried forward to the actual vote. It is the same process that was strongly recommended with respect to the board seats, so on a practical level it makes sense to use only one type of voting on one ballot to reduce confusion.
On 11/05/07, W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.) <huelsmann@datenschutzverein.de> wrote:
Hello,
on https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 I read:
"VOTERS: The designated voters (1 per ALS) of ALSes who have signed the Memorandum of Understanding with ICANN either in-person at the Lisbon ICANN meeting or digitally via electronic mail - at any time before the beginning of the voting"
There must be a mistake: First of all we have to decide, if this "strong recommendation" will be accepted.
Next: If there are two seats we have to vote for ALAC, then every voter should have two possible votes. The two candidates with the most votes will be elected. This is the democratical way of election. There ist no need for such a ranking.
After the election of the two members for the ALAC seats we have two decide, how many seats shall the EURALO board have. The election of the EURALO boad members can't start before we know how many board members are to elect.
Kind Regarts,
Werner Hülsmann
#################################################### Vorratsdatenspeicherung? Nein Danke! - Noch ist es nicht zu spät: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de ####################################################
--
Dipl. Inform. Werner Hülsmann Vorstandsmitglied der Deutschen Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. Obere Laube 48 - D-78462 Konstanz Tel.: 07531 / 365905-6 Mobil: 0179 / 46 86 484 E-Mail: huelsmann@datenschutzverein.dehttp://www.datenschutzverein.de
_______________________________________________ EURO-ALS mailing list EURO-ALS@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-als_atlarge-lists.icann...
participants (6)
-
"W.Hülsmann (DVD e.V.)" -
Dr. Christoph Bruch -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Rudi Vansnick -
Stefan Hügel -
Veni Markovski